the gay marriage agenda. CP are the modern standard marriage and the whole church are archaic. The views on us & women are enough to ignore it but no those right wing idiots want to be “respectable” while they have a cock in their mouths

Slightly bizarre way of looking at it, James! What has a sexual practice common to gays and straights got to do with respectability? It is a question of equality. CPs should be made available to opposite sex couples if they are to remain and marriage should be made available to same sex couples. It’s not for you to decide what choices we are not to have.

UK marriages are recognised outside of the UK. UK CPs are not, and in the increasing number of countries extended marriage to all they never will be. Married Swedish same-sex couples can move to Portugal and their relationship is automatically recognised. Why should UK citizens be put at a disadvantage?

Who is harassing churches? Nobody is demanding religious marriage but some religious denominations such as the Quakers, Liberal and Reformed Judaism, the Unitarians would like to marry us and they should have that right. The main stream denominations, CoE and RC church can do as they wish and continue to discriminate to kingdom come. Who really cares?

The only people harassing churches are other churches. If the Quakers, Unitarians, or members of other faiths such as two major branches of Judaism want to marry same-sex couples why should the Vatican or C of E tell them they cannot? Any religion that wants to do this should be permitted to, and any religion that does not permitted to refuse.

But don’t think that this is really about religious marriage James. The two major UK churches don’t want any same-sex couples to marry, not even in civil ceremonies.

It doesn’t sound to me, James, as though you are very comfortable with your sexuality.

You refer to “right wing idiots [who] want to be “respectable” while they have a c**k [my edit] in their mouths.”

Why shouldn’t someone who performs fellatio be considered to be respectable? There is nothing about sex that should be considered to reduce someone’s respectability, so long as it is consensual, non-abusive and safe. You seem to be equating respectability with celibacy, or at least with not performing fellatio.

Don’t buy into the centuries of religious indoctrination that has tried to poison our sexuality and make us feel bad about it.

Oh, that sounds so “self-loathing” of you, James!
The “gay right” were always here, it’s just you lefty twats liked to give the impression that any LGBT person that wasn’t a fully paid-up member of the Communist party was a traitor to their kind.

In other words, the C of E is terrified at losing the support from the African clergy. The church cannot adapt to the changing times – look at the furore caused by ex-Archbishop George Carey, by the wobbly leadership of Rowan Williams. This is a sick institution which has a finite lifespan. Let’s just levy taxes against their estates and enjoy the hundreds of millions we can rake in.

Still living in the past, as their congregations get smaller and smaller the cofe will have to use some of the billions of pounds locked up in shares and property, they should start paying their share of taxation to the government, like everyone else. We feel sorry for the parents of Gay siblings whom wish their offspring a better life in a marriage, work, education, happiness, but, to be cast aside by the church because of their outdated dogma.

Robert Piggott in the BBC said this: The dark horse of the contest, he does lack experience on Church leadership – he wasn’t even a bishop a year ago – but his impressive record in the “real” world of business and finance might appeal.

I guess it could have been work – John Semantu. Maybe they have appointed a traditional conservative to appeal to a global organisation. But agree with others, unless he changes his views on gays, CofE is going to become even more irrelevant in the UK

As an Old Etonian you might have thought he would be more tolerant of gays. Last sunday the Earl of Grantham said in defence of his gay valet who had tried to kiss a footman: “If I’d screamed blue murder every time someone tried to kiss me at Eton I would have been hoarse within a month.”

So ironic that a 1920s fictional Earl written by a Tory peer is more progressive than a likely 21st century Archbishop.

Oh for God’s sake (so to speak), have we still not progressed beyond this “looks so gay” nonsense? Do you not think imagining an individual’s secret sexuality from one photograph is unwise? (‘Secret’ because he’s married with 5 children.)

Most of the gays I know are married with children…So you know little about what u speak…and yes many are clergy…married with children does not make one not gay…thats why I said wolf in sheeps clothing…

He can be as anti-gay as he wants, he doesn’t have to “like” or “approve” of any of us (although the craven swine Williams concedes that church negativity is part of the cultural zeitgeist that injures LGBT people).

What he does have to do is get his dirty hands off our rights. Marriage does not belong to the church, never has. It is a civil matter with a ceremonial aspect for those that wish it.

That said, his church continues to be a as much a crumbling anachronism as the buildings themselves. And nothing of value will be lost when the whole thing turns to dust.

Although this quote is specifically about the US situation it can equally apply to the Anglican church’s stand on marriage equality.
“the issue of gay marriage is a generational one, a battle that social conservatives have lost … fighting this one is political flat-earthism.” (Jennifer Rubin,)

This man has an advanced form of mental illness. A relative of mine once heard voices, and she was treated by means of E.C.T. Perhaps he could receive similar treatment followed by a period in a lunatic asylum.

Having spoken to Christians in my Role as an Interfaith Representative and found the majority of Christians are bewildered by Gay Men and Women and are trying to understand ‘their choice’ and wish them no malice but wish to see them ‘brought into the fold’ ;
It then comes as no suprise that the Church authorities choses someone who does not represent the thoughts of its members , but rather the party line of it’s Committee Elite

Congratulations and welcome Archbishop.
Good to know you are for traditional marriage, maybe you could meet with that pathetic excuse of a PM we have and encourage him to drop his plans before he loses more voters

“Traditional” biblical marriage permitted polygamy, wives the property of their husbands, chattel in other words. Read the old testament dumb arse! Equal civil marriage is coming whether idiots such as yourself like it or not. Civil marriage isn’t traditional, it was invented by the state to allow divorced people and serial hetero adulterers to remarry, over and over and has NOTHING to do with religion or “traditional” marriage.

Equal marriage REALLY bothers you, doesn’t it, Matthew? Do you wish gay people would be invisible so you could ignore the gayness inside yourself that you claim your NARTH therapy is helping you with or do you think it makes you look more straight to oppose equal rights?

You’d be a lot happier if you accepted yourself. There’s nothing wrong with being gay so stop beating yourself up about it. Read more widely and find some friends who aren’t fundies with an agenda. I feel sorry for you.

Anyway, I am always somewhat confused by homophobic clergy who are ever so keen on Priestesses and Bishopesses, neither of which have any Biblical support (traditional or otherwise) YET get into a hissy fit at the mere mention of Gay Clergy (again, which the Bible does not condemn or even comment on)?

So why is it that they can accept Priestesses and try to defend yet utterly condemn and forbid Gay Clergy?

Proves to me that this is all about bigotry and homophobia.

Remember ArchBigot, that the C of E would collapse without all those Gay Clergy hiding in their closets up and down the land!

It’s surprising that a specific bishop could be called ‘anti-gay’ when the entire Anglican Church is homophobic. By implication anyone involved with the Church must be anti-gay becasue they passively accept homophobia. If you wear the uniform of the Church, attend Church or give money to the Church then you are feeding the beast.

A face well suited to an Inquisitor. Another dinosaur trotted out to help with the demise of the Cult of England. He should get on well with Ratzi the Naz1 of the Roman Catholic Cult. All in all I can’t say it is a bad thing that this homophobe has been appointed if it hastens the demise of Religion in the UK, something that cannot happen too soon; they have blighted our lives for far too long.

So that is the end of the Church of England. However we still have the Anglican Communion where we can, by and large, be free of bigotry and have Gay Priests ordained by Gay Friendly Bishops and establish our own independent churches, parishes and monasteries. I, for one have had enough, and I now no longer recognise the Church of England as being a credible, truthful or legitimate organisation. I also call on the Bishop of Salisbury and the Bishop of Bucks and any other Gay Friendly Bishop to fully support the Anglican Communion as being the only real Christian Anglican organisation that truly represents the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ in real time action. A full and complete split from the Church of England is now essential for the survival of the Anglican Communion.

I don’t know why so many LGBTs have anything to do with the CE or RC churches. They’re all a bunch of deeply sad creepy old bigots anyway. What exactly does the Cof E have to offer anyone? It’s abit sad to hanker after the acceptance of the sadest people around in this way!

I don’t get the logic in calling this man “vile” – he hasn’t yet been anmed and certainly hasn’t made many statements. We are working on speculation that he is anti-gay-marriage….note not necessarily anti gay.
Wait and see I say – give the bloke a chance

Unless the report is entirely inaccurate that “He is firmly against same-sex marriage and is also opposed to gay people serving as bishops.” why should anyone give him a chance when he is already known to be anti-marriage equality and an homophobic bigot.
Shame on the Anglican church, shame on Justin Welby and his live-in girlfriend/partner Caroline.

equal marriage is upon your ass justin welby the uk is giving religion the boot. as for david cameron the tory he knows his party will be out on their arses if equal marriage isnt introduced before the next election

The fart looks so so boring. He will be a disaster for the Anglican Church if he is avowedly anti-gay. How could David Cameron accept such a person when he is about to introduce legislation for marriage equality! It means he is irrelevant and regressive even before he starts.

Or he might get a better offer elsewhere. His less-than-twelve-month tenure in Durham hardly suggests constancy,staying power or integrity, Comforting though that England is at last classless—everyone went to Eton.

Gosh look at him, another case of self loathing. It is only a matter of time before the African church and the liberal North American church break away. Then, All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well, to quote Julian of Norwich.

I think, Mr. Cameron has only this choice: homophobic fanatic from York or more moderate bishop of Durham. Gay rights was a subject in the conversation of Prime Minister with both candidates, and the statement of Mr. Welby was, that as Archbishop of Canterbury he will be more open and gay friendly – so my impression after his speech today. Good. And thank you, Mr. Cameron!

This article is very onesided – the Church of England could have done a lot worse than Welby. While he might not believe in gay marriage, he’s openly agreed with gay civil partnerships (for an arch-bishop, that’s radical!). Too little, too late, maybe, but he was certainly the most LGBT-friendly candidate. Also, his stance on woman bishops might show the CoE that they’re living behind the times and that it’s useless to fear change.

As far as equal marriage is concerned, I just hope he and his fellow Anglicans pay due respect to what the New Testament teaches us in, for example, St Paul’s Epistle to the Romans chapter 13 verses 1-7, and St Peter’s first Epistle chapter 2 verses 13-17.